Final answer:
Active monitoring allows a probation officer to locate an offender at any time using GPS, offering a stronger deterrence than passive monitoring, which involves periodic check-ins. While more technically advanced and expensive, active monitoring is seen as a more effective preventive method compared to the extremely high costs of incarceration.
Step-by-step explanation:
The benefit of active monitoring over passive monitoring lies in its ability to allow real-time tracking and thereby a potentially stronger deterrence against offenders committing new crimes. Active monitoring, commonly through the use of GPS technology, enables a probation officer to locate an offender at any given moment. This proactivity contrasts with passive systems where the offender may be required to check in periodically but is not continuously observed. Consequently, active monitoring requires more sophisticated technology and equipment which can be expensive, but it acts as a preventive tool by ensuring closer supervision of the offender’s movements, which may reduce the risk of recidivism.
While such technology is indeed costly, it is still generally less expensive than incarceration, which in the U.S as of 2021 costs on average $43,836 per year for federal prisoners. Alternative methods such as diversion to drug treatment or early release with the threat of a longer sentence for reoffending are also considered more cost-effective than intensive monitoring by probation officers. The use of electronic toll collection systems such as E-ZPass, FasTrak, and I-Pass is an example of technology that can be repurposed for passive monitoring of traffic flow or tracking movements for various purposes.